Skip to main content

you've never met a man like me before

i sort of resent the fact that spammers aren't making much of an effort to be funny or interesting anymore. i still get lots of messages, but it's kind of like being a lobster fisherman who goes to check his traps and finds out that they're all filled with empty shells. [actually, that might be more interesting, now that i think about it. nancy drew does maritime labourer mysteries.]

i get lots of emails telling me i have to sign an attached invoice, or read an attached fax, or do any number of other things that involve opening a zip file attached to the email. i get lots of messages telling me where i can buy drugs [none that are interesting, though] and what "it's a real company, honest!" stocks i should be buying. but recently, this turned up in a spam search and caught my eye.


ok, anna, i'm afraid you may indeed be mistaken about me. [i don't want to know how you could be mistaken in me, because i'd probably end up with some kind of disease.] i guess i shouldn't be surprised that, despite my clearly female name, you seem to believe i'm a man, because you don't seem entirely clear on your own name. i'll take your word for it and assume you're anna, but that raises some uncomfortable questions about where betty is and what you've done with her. until i know that, i don't think we can be friends.

then i found this [in a different email account's spam folder], from someone named "dana":


i think it's a pretty dire sign for the world if i'm the only decent man left in it.

also, we should probably talk about this sitting in the networks thing you're doing. do you mean you're holed up in a server room somewhere? because, yeah, you're never going to meet men that way. or women. or women you think are men.

and there are a couple of other suggestions i'd like to make:

1. when you do meet men, can i suggest you not start the conversation with "my boyfriend left me"? i'm not sure about ukrainian customs, but in english speaking countries, at least, it's more common to lead with "hello" or the more informal "hi". and even after that, i wouldn't just rush into the bit about getting kicked to the curb, because it immediately triggers questions like "why?" and "what am i getting myself into?" and "what's wrong with her?" and once thoughts like that start to float around, it sort of kills the romantic atmosphere.

2. i think you were trying to end your email with an emoticon, like so:
:-))
which would be adorable, except that your emoticon guy has no eyes or nose, unlike, say, the first one you used. seeing this makes me wonder how many actual human beings you've ever seen if you think that fifty percent of them have faces with one big mouth-hole and nothing else and it leads me to the conclusion that you're either living in some radiation-ridden nightmare straight out of the hills have eyes, or that you've spent most of your life locked in a basement and don't know that the hideous mouth-monster who comes to drop off your meals is not indicative of most human anatomy.

i feel like maybe i should tell these young ladies to email each other. i mean, they both seem to want company. they both seem to be a little confused about their gender preferences. yes, there's a vague possibility that one of them murdered another woman for her email account and that the other is surrounded by a cult of irradiated mouth-monsters, but, really, every relationship has its challenges.

so you see? this is a really positive blog post about how there truly is a match for everyone out there. i am like the cupid of the spam set. of course, cupid was male and i'm not, although i'm starting to feel like i shouldn't be so sure.

Comments

as long as you're here, why not read more?

fun-raising

no, i am not dead, nor have i been lying incapacitated in a ditch somewhere. i've mostly been preparing for our imminent, epic move, which is actually not so terribly epic, because we found a place quite close to where we are now. in addition, i've been the beneficiary of an inordinately large amount of paying work, which does, sadly, take precedence over blogging, even though you know i'd always rather be with you.

indeed, with moving expenses and medical expenses looming on the horizon, more than can be accounted for even with the deepest cuts in the lipstick budget, dom and i recently did something that we've not done before: we asked for help. last week, we launched a fundraising campaign on go fund me. it can be difficult to admit that you need a helping hand, but what's been overwhelming for both of us is how quick to respond so many people we know have been once we asked. it's also shocking to see how quickly things added up.

most of all, though, the ex…

losers?

just a short time ago, i waxed prosaic about trump supporters who felt betrayed by their candidate pursuing in office the exact things that he said he would. short version: i have no sympathy.

today is a bit different. in the wake of america's bombing of a syrian air strip, in response to a chemical weapons attack by the syrian government, my facebook and twitter feeds were peppered with plaintive shades of "we believed you". these are the people who heard trump say that he wanted the united states to step back and focus on defending its own. indeed, trump did say such things, over and over; america cannot be the policeman of the world. even arch-liberal cynics like me had to admit that this was a refreshing argument to hear from someone outside the paul family, and, could easily have been turned into trump's greatest argument against hillary clinton. [he chose to go another way, which also worked.]

trump also said, repeatedly, that america needed to invest heavily …

long division

after the united states election last year, there were the usual calls for the country to unite behind the new president. that never happens anymore, because, since george w. bush scored a victory in 2004, having launched the country into a war in iraq for no reason, the people on the losing side of a presidential election have been pretty bloody angry about it. democrats hated bush 43. republicans really hated obama. democrats really hate trump.

it didn't help that trump didn't make the typical conciliatory gestures like including a couple of members of the opposite party in his cabinet, or encouraging his party to proceed slowly with contentious legislation. barack obama arguably wasted at least two and as many as six years of his tenure as president trying to play peacemaker before he felt sufficiently safe to just say "screw you guys" and start governing around the ridiculous congress he was forced to deal with. not-giving-a-shit obama was the best president in …